@@ What Iranian obligations; What breaches? @@
Arash
May 16, 2005
Bush's Nutty Referral
Dr. James Gordon Prather
Nuclear weapons physicist
Nuclear bomb tester at Lawrence Livermore
Technical director of nuclear bomb testings at Sandia
Chief scientist of the U.S. Army
U.S. Navy veteran
Well, according to Reuters, France-Britain-Germany "warned" Iran that they will "break off
talks and join Washington in seeking UN Security Council action if Tehran makes good on
its threats to resume atomic work".
Poodle Tony Blair promptly announced, "We certainly will support referral to the UN
Security Council if Iran breaches its undertakings and obligations".
What talks?
What Iranian threats?
What breaches?
What Iranian undertakings?
What Iranian obligations?
Well, the French-Brit-German and Iranian foreign ministers met in Tehran back in October
of 2003, emerging to announce that the Iranian government had been persuaded to sign an
additional protocol to its Safeguards Agreement with the International Atomic Energy
Agency and to immediately commence ratification procedures. In the meantime, as a
"confirmation of its good intentions," the Iranian government <<volunteered>> to cooperate
with the IAEA in accordance with the additional protocol.
Furthermore, even though Iran had the "inalienable right" as a signatory to the Treaty on
Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, Iran
announced that – as a further "confidence-building measure" – it would <<temporarily>>
suspend all uranium enrichment and processing activities already planned or underway
Last November, the French-Brit-German foreign ministers – acting as agents for the
European Union – began "talks" with Iran on "a mutually acceptable long-term arrangement."
To build further confidence, Iran decided to <<voluntarily>> continue its temporary
suspension of all enrichment related and reprocessing activities, including
1. the manufacture and import of gas centrifuges and their components;
2. the assembly, installation, testing, or operation of gas centrifuges;
3. work to undertake any plutonium separation, or to construct or operate any plutonium
separation installation; and
4. all tests or production at any uranium conversion installation.
The IAEA was officially notified of this <<voluntary>> suspension and <<invited>> to
verify and monitor it.
The IAEA Board of Governors was officially notified that the <<voluntary>> suspension by
Iran was <<NOT>> a legal obligation and would be sustained only so long as the EU-Iranian
talks continued.
What did the Europeans hope to gain from these "talks"?
Essentially, a normalization of diplomatic and economic relations with oil-gas-rich Iran.
What did Iran hope to gain from these "talks"?
They, too, wanted normalization: the lifting of economic sanctions that have been imposed
and threatened for more than 20 years by the U.S. on Russian, Chinese, South American, and
European companies that do business with Iran.
But more than that, Iran wanted tangible recognition by the EU of their inalienable right
under the NPT to the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
Finally, Iran sought firm guarantees from the EU that Iranian peaceful "nuclear"
activities and facilities would be secure from attack or destruction.
So even though Reuters "reports" that the EU is breaking off the "talks" because the
Iranians have "threatened" to resume – subject to their IAEA Safeguards Agreement –
converting uranium-tetrafluoride to uranium-hexafluoride, it is more likely that it is
Iran breaking off the talks because the EU has been unable to overcome U.S. objections to
establishing normal diplomatic and trade relations with Iran, much less providing the
Iranians guarantees against U.S. or Israeli preemptive strikes.
What happens next?
Well, the Iranians will probably turn to Russia and China to secure tangible recognition
of their inalienable rights, as well as protection against U.S. or Israeli preemptive
strikes.
How about the EU?
Well, President Bush (who wasn't even a party to the "talks") says he's going to take the
decision by Iran to resume certain safeguarded activities – voluntarily suspended,
temporarily – to the UN Security Council. And poodle Blair says he'll support that
referral.
That's nuttier than when Bush and Bolton were demanding that the IAEA Board refer to the
UN Security Council the "nuclear weapons program" they claimed Iran was pursuing that
Director General ElBaradei had spent two years searching Iran for, and could find
absolutely no evidence of.
At least there's a provision in the IAEA Statute – reaffirmed at the 2000 NPT Review
Conference (http://www.ceip.org/programs/npp/NPT2000FinalText.htm) – for Bush-Bolton doing
that.
"The Conference reaffirms that the IAEA is the competent authority responsible to verify
and assure – in accordance with the statute of the IAEA and the IAEA's safeguards system –
compliance with its safeguards agreements with states parties…
"States parties that have concerns regarding noncompliance with the safeguards
agreements of the treaty by the states parties should direct such concerns, along with
supporting evidence and information, to the IAEA to consider, investigate, draw
conclusions, and decide on necessary actions in accordance with its mandate".
Dr. Prather's radio interviews
May 7, 2005
http://www.weekendinterviewshow.com/audio/prather4.mp3
April 9, 2005
http://www.weekendinterviewshow.com/audio/prather3.mp3
February 5, 2005
http://www.weekendinterviewshow.com/audio/prather2.mp3
December 4, 2004
http://www.weekendinterviewshow.com/audio/prather.mp3
February 16, 2005
Part 1
http://www.charlesgoyette.com/archive/media/2005-02-16-Charles-04.mp3
Part 2
http://www.charlesgoyette.com/archive/media/2005-02-16-Charles-05.mp3
* Physicist James Gordon Prather has served as a policy implementing official for national
security-related technical matters in the Federal Energy Agency, the Energy Research and
Development Administration, the Department of Energy, the Office of the Secretary of
Defense and the Department of the Army. Dr. Prather also served as legislative assistant
for national security affairs to U.S. Sen. Henry Bellmon, R-Okla. -- ranking member of the
Senate Budget Committee and member of the Senate Energy Committee and Appropriations
Committee. Dr. Prather had earlier worked as a nuclear weapons physicist at Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory (http://www.llnl.gov) in California and Sandia National
Laboratory (http://www.sandia.gov) in New Mexico.
Kavik Kang
news:QxQje.3622$pi1....@newscontent-01.sprint.ca...
Obligation could refer to their responsibilty to their own people to not
force the US to invade Iran. This won't work out well for the people of
Iran if they force the US to invade them and bring all of their nuclear
related equipment back to the US where it belongs.
Breach probably refers to their failure to recognize that they do not have
permission to build a nuclear weapon, which they are very obviously
attempting to do.
Iran only has a few months left to comply with the orders they have been
given.
Joubin Houshyar
Do it now.
There is no need for the "superpower" to play these 'games' ... Just
invade ... the country is surrounded ... it has an "outdated" military
... it is "100 years behind" ... you have MKO terrorists who are
willing to betray their people their soul their wives ') ... you have
"noocLiyer" weapons .. you have all these very very expensive ships in
the Khalijeh Fars ... you have mercenaries from south africa ...
torturers from zionistan ... grunts from Central America willing to
kill for citizenship ... and your 'stature' in the world has never been
higher ..
what's the hold up? Politics?
americans have swallowed 911 .. they have swallowed patriot act .. they
have swallowed Enron .. they have swallowed the "bubble" ... they have
swallowed 'outsourcing' ... they have swallowed 3 stolen elections ..
they have swallowed torture .. shitting on the constitution .. they
have swallowed "endless war" .. they have swallowed "WMD in Iraq" ..
they have swalloed "Al Qaida linked with Iraq" ... they swallowed
every pathetic transparent lie thrown in their faces ..
these are a people on their backs!
what then are you waiting for?
Kavik Kang
news:1116729716.9...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Iran's elections, you truly are too stupid for words! We have time, Iran is
still not anywhere close to having a nuclear weapon but they are getting
there.
As for all of your conspiracy theory nonsense, thanks for that, it always
helps when you discredit yourself like that. It makes my job so much
easier, I don't have to bother pointing out that you are a moron when you
prove it yourself for me.
Joubin Houshyar
to the recipe ... Rabid Rabbit Roast with Zereshk and Baa Doom ... ;)
Kavik Kang
> ... My Khar keeps forgetting that I don't 'bank' with him ... now back
> to the recipe ... Rabid Rabbit Roast with Zereshk and Baa Doom ... ;)
So in other words you have no response. By the way, below is the original
issue that you have avoided in all of your incoherant ramblings. This is
what you have been replying too. As anyone can see, you have ignored it all
along and merely attempted to deflect attention away from the actual subject
of the conversation. Thank you for such an excellent example of the type of
dishonest trickery that your kind relies on in a feeble attempt to maintain
credability.
"Really? Then why are they using elements of their program that are only
needed if you wish to build nuclear weapons and are not needed for power?
Why are they building long range missiles when the only practical use of a
long range missile is to carry a nuclear warhead?
They are like a 5 year old with a plan to fool his parents that any 6 year
old can see right through. It is very obvious to anyone who knows even just
a little about nuclear weapons that Iran is attempting to build one. It is
a cold war axiom that any nation working on long range missiles is
attemtping to build a nuclear weapon. Their intent is obvious to all but
those who are totally ignorant of nuclear weapons.
You aren't fooling anyone, although Iran does look foolish believing that
they are."
Joubin Houshyar
and appear to not get it. :( In any event, I was busy with my recipe
for Rabid Rabbit Roast with Zereshk and other ingredients ..
So, Repeat:
Iran can do whatever it wants within the limits set by NPT.
Now as to your "axiom"
There is no linkage in NPT with "long range missiles" or your purported
"cold war axiom".
I suggest you sit on your axiom and rotate.
this is good practice for my Recipe calls for a Rod, to be inserted,
forcefully if we must, from the hinde quarter of the skinned rabid
rabbit all the way tah galoosh ..
Kavik Kang
> You have had your "response" from various quarters. You are a bit dull
> and appear to not get it. :( In any event, I was busy with my recipe
> for Rabid Rabbit Roast with Zereshk and other ingredients ..
Actually anyone can look back in this very short threat and see that you
failed to address a single point. Your dishonest tactics are feeble and do
not work.
> So, Repeat:
>
> Iran can do whatever it wants within the limits set by NPT.
No it can't. It can do whatever more powerful nations will allow it to do
and nothing more, as is true for all nations and has been true since the
dawn of mankind. If a nation capable of invading Iran and replacing it's
government is willing to use that power to impose it's will on Iran, or any
other nation, then Iran (or any other nation) either comply's with the more
powerful nation or ceases to exist. This is nothing new, the world has
worked this way since the first time two groups of cave people got into a
dispute.
The NPT is irrelivant. We have told Iran that they are not allowed to have
nuclear weapons, your precious "NPT" has nothing to do with the situation at
all. Iran has been given an order by a global nuclear superpower that is
ready to enforce that order. Iran must either comply or cease to exist in
it's present form. Welcome back to reality! Are you ever going to figure
out how the world really works and has worked since the dawn of time?
> Now as to your "axiom"
It isn't "my" axiom, it is a cold war axiom. I can also tell that you have
no idea what the word means. It means "truism", it means something that is
always true given the same conditions. Any nation building long range
missiles is attempting to build a nuclear weapon because, very obviously,
long range missiles have only one practical use... carrying nuclear
warheads. You are dealing with the nation that invented nuclear weapons and
has lived with them for 60 years, your primative knowledge is childlike too
us. We see right through Iran's childlike attempts at concealing their
attempt to build nuclear weapons in the same exact way that a parent sees
through their child's attempt too fool them. It would be cute it the
subject were not nuclear weapons in the hands of children.
> There is no linkage in NPT with "long range missiles" or your purported
> "cold war axiom".
That's only because you very obviously didn't understand what that phrase
meant. Now that you do, I imagine that even someone of your limited
inteligence is capable of seeing the truth of the situation. By the way,
your use of the word "linkage" proves that you didn't understand what the
word "axiom" meant, as it has no relation to the situation.
> I suggest you sit on your axiom and rotate.
A further indication that you didn't know what the word meant. You would
have had to have known what the word meant for that to be insulting. The
fact that Iran is building long range missiles is absolute proof that they
are attempting to build nuclear weapons. Anyone who knows anything at all
about the subject understands that. The only practical use of long range
missiles is to deliver nuclear warheads. They are extremely expensive and,
for all nations other than the US, highly inaccurate. They are only useful
for one thing. Iranians are collossally stupid to have not realized that
long range missiles are absolute proof of their attempt to build nuclear
weapons.
> this is good practice for my Recipe calls for a Rod, to be inserted,
> forcefully if we must, from the hinde quarter of the skinned rabid
> rabbit all the way tah galoosh ..
That's because you are a demented, sexually deviant freak. That's pretty
bad on it's own, but when you add on top of that your near total ignorance
of practically everything, you really are a sad and pathetic person.
Joubin Houshyar
same conditions."
And it is repeated that things have changed.
+ No one has threated you (unless you think you are a rabbit!)
"That's because you are a demented, sexually deviant freak. That's
pretty
bad on it's own, but when you add on top of that your near total
ignorance
of practically everything, you really are a sad and pathetic person. "
Don't get angry.
(The recipe calls for a tranquil little rabbit -- you'll spoil the
flavor you know ...)
I.K. Flin
If you had been reading my posts and thinking about reality instead of
burying your head in that toilet where the Quoran lay then you would have
realized that the IRI cannot be trusted to uphold any agreement because it
never has upheld any agreement.
From: "I.K. Flin" <rsav...@yahoo.com>
Subject: IRI says subterfuge necessary..
Date: Saturday, May 21, 2005 1:28 PM
Here we all are again. IRI says they will follow agreements after they admit
they have broken all past agreements. I still think the EU's request that
the IRI purchase their enriched Uranium is not asking for much in lieu of
the fact that the IRI has admitted to breaking every agreement ever made
with any country in the past. These are the same people that took US
diplomats hostage -an action that every country abhored, destroyed Iranian
culture to be replaced by Islam, and say they want a civilized society of
laws just before admitting that they broke the rules of the International
Atomic Energy Agency for 2 decades. Furthermore, the IRI uses the excuse
that it is everyone else's fault for the IRI's violations of past
agreements.
I keep telling people that Borderline personality disorder has the same
characteristics and uses the same manipulation strategies. Not everyone is a
healthcare professional but the US does have professional advisors including
psychologists who analyze these behaviors. History will not be kind to this
Islamic government. It is unfortunate that the Iranians in Iran have to put
up with the blustering around of their own government. If the IRI is in
anyway successful in its negotiations it is only because too many people
feel sorry for the people of the country because the country is run by
incompetent individuals picked by the-what is the Islamic term? "Fuckie"?
-Iris
Iran Seeks Incentives From Europe in Impasse
By NEIL MacFARQUHAR
Published: May 19, 2005
TEHRAN, May 18 - The European Union and Iran will not break the impasse over
restraining Iran's nuclear development program unless the Europeans offer
significant incentives like a deal for 10 nuclear reactors, a top Iranian
negotiator said Wednesday.
Hossein Mousavian is representing Iran in negotiations with Europe on
Iran's nuclear development program.
But no incentives will persuade Iran to abandon its plans to enrich fuel,
said Hossein Mousavian, a negotiator with Iran's Supreme National Security
Council. That is the central demand of the United States, which suspects
that Iran would divert the resulting fuel to make nuclear arms.
In an interview on Wednesday, Mr. Mousavian accused the Europeans of
stalling, saying, "The maximum announced was U.S. readiness to give spare
parts for used airplanes, which is just a joke as the result of three months
of negotiations."
The top Iranian negotiator, Hassan Rowhani, is scheduled to meet with the
foreign ministers of France, Britain and Germany in Paris on Tuesday to try
to break the deadlock that stalled the last round of negotiations on April
29.
Although Iran has suspended fuel enrichment during negotiations, Mr.
Mousavian emphasized that the suspension of all aspects of the fuel cycle
could last only a few more months.
"We would be prepared to continue suspension of enrichment for two to three
more months, or some months, to test whether there would be any outcome of
negotiations," he said.
He said Iran would provide whatever guarantees or provisions for inspections
might be necessary to prove that it was not diverting the fuel to build
nuclear weapons. "Iran is 100 percent flexible, open, ready to negotiate, to
compromise on any mechanism, but not cessation," he said.
For example, he said, Iran has proposed reaching a complete enrichment cycle
in four phases over two years in order for the West to grow confident that
it was not trying to build nuclear weapons. "In terms of the different
phases and the time of each phase, we have not closed the door for the
Europeans," he said.
The fuel cycle starts with converting uranium ore, known as yellowcake, to
gas, which is then fed into centrifuges for enrichment. The level of
enrichment depends on how many times the gas is fed through the centrifuge.
At low levels, the fuel can be used for nuclear power; the highest level of
enrichment produces fuel that can be used to make nuclear bombs.
It remains unclear that phases spread over two years would constitute much
of a compromise, since some of the more technical aspects of the fuel cycle,
including building the 3,000 centrifuges that Iran wants to enrich uranium,
might take that long anyway.
In exchange for allowing international inspectors to monitor every stage of
the process, Iran expects a major package of incentives involving its
security, political stability and economic development, Mr. Mousavian noted.
Iranian officials, scientists and scholars interviewed over the past few
days all insisted that Iran would never give up its right as a signer of the
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to enrich fuel for peaceful means. Iran
needs to enrich fuel to ensure a steady supply of electricity, develop
related medical technologies and advance technologically, they said.
The Americans and the European Union counter that Iran forfeited the right
to peaceful nuclear technology because it organized a deliberate effort to
hide the activity, facilities and materials of its nuclear development
program from the rest of the world for two decades.
Iran seeks to use the nuclear issue to end the international isolation it
has been subjected to in varying degrees since its 1979 Islamic Revolution,
analysts in Tehran believe, so it cares less about the timing of the steps
than about getting an agreement.
But so far Iran has seen nothing to indicate that the European trio, backed
by the United States, is even contemplating offering the level of incentives
Tehran expects. "The other side is still at the point of zero," Mr.
Mousavian said.
Negotiators had anticipated delaying further talks until after the June 17
presidential elections in Iran, waiting to see what kind of government would
emerge. But there is widespread consensus among Iranians that the country
should be allowed to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.
Possible compromises that would allow Iran to have a limited number of
centrifuges to enrich uranium are being discussed, if not yet negotiated.
Some experts believe that it is better to allow Iran to have an open program
that can be monitored rather than a clandestine one that it would probably
build anyway.
"It's much better to have 500 centrifuges under the eye of everybody than 50
clandestine ones out in the desert somewhere," said one expert on
nonproliferation talks who did not want his name or country linked to this
proposal.
A senior European diplomat familiar with the proposal said if Iran had only
500 centrifuges, it would take 10 years or so to make enough material for
one bomb. However, American officials have said that even a small number of
centrifuges would allow Iran to master the technology.
Iran, however, has proposed that it move step by step through the stages of
uranium enrichment, including installing 3,000 centrifuges in its enrichment
plant at Natanz. That level would certainly give it enough material for a
bomb, and it is also the basic building block for Iran's eventual plans to
build 50,000 centrifuges.
But there are concerns that Iran, as it improved its knowledge from any
small program it is allowed to run, might build a secret parallel system on
a military base that international inspectors could not detect.
Iran denies any interest in developing a bomb. Officials and scientists
interviewed said they found the move to deny Iran nuclear technology
particularly grating because before the Islamic Revolution, the West had
offered to help Iran develop nuclear power. The United States had been
willing to sell Iran 23 nuclear power plants, Germany was building the
Bushehr nuclear reactor - which the Russians are finally scheduled to help
complete next year - and France signed a contract to supply nuclear fuel.
Asked for a specific example of the kind of incentive Iran now seeks, Mr.
Mousavian said, "Europe can agree in principle to a contract for 10 nuclear
power plants for Iran."
Given that major American companies hold the licenses for the most advanced
nuclear power plants, and that significant investment in Iran is banned
under American sanctions, such a deal would be impossible without American
approval. But Iran considers sanctions a problem to be solved by European
negotiators, not Iran, Mr. Mousavian said.
The European trio, backed by the United States, has sought through the talks
to convince Iran to abandon its nuclear program in exchange for guaranteed
fuel supplies from abroad.
But in recent weeks Iran has threatened to restart the first step in the
processing of raw uranium at its uranium conversion plant at Isfahan,
although not the enrichment itself, if the talks remain deadlocked.
The European Union said any Iranian moves to start the fuel cycle, even the
steps before enrichment, would prompt it to break off the talks and refer
Iran to the United Nations Security Council for possible penalties.
Iran admits to hiding significant elements of its nuclear development
program from the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations
watchdog against nuclear proliferation, over almost two decades. It said
such subterfuge was necessary because of the sanctions against it. Iran is
suspected by some proliferation experts of hiding a secret program to
develop nuclear weapons.
"Joubin Houshyar" <Sun_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1116732975.4...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Kavik Kang
> "It means "truism", it means something that is always true given the
> same conditions."
>
> And it is repeated that things have changed.
No, nothing has changed. There is still no practical use for a long range
missile other than delivering nuclear warheads. God you are stupid. hat
simple fact has not changed. And you aren't "repeating" anything, you
didn't even understand the conversation until I explained it too you in the
last post. Nothing has changed, there is still no practical use for a long
range missile other than delivering nuclear warheads. Any nation that
builds long range missiles is, therefore, attempting to build nuclear
weapons. The Iranians were obviously too stupid to realize this, or they
never would have built long range missiles.
So, to ask the two questions again that started this conversation, which you
have still avoided and attempted to deflect attention away from...
1) If Iran is not attempting to build nuclear weapons, why have they
developed long range missiles?
...and
2) If Iran is so deeply and honestly concerned with their precious NPT why
do they not critisize Russia for failing almost completely to reduce their
nuclear arsenal? The US has done so, eliminating more than half of it's
cold war era arsenal. The Russians have not done so.
As is very clear by now, you will not attempt to respond to either question,
because you have no response, and will instead just attempt to insult me
again... and fail again.
It's very simple, qoute back the questions in your response, and give your
answer to each question beneath the question. You seem to need help in
figuring out how to reply directly... either that or you know that Iran is
building nuclear weapons and are merely making yourself a part of their
propaganda machine (the obvious truth of the situation). So either answer
the question, or admit that you are simply an enemy propagandist (which you
really have already effectively done).
Joubin Houshyar
But this is a bit puzzling.
It is not clear ?why? you consistently goshaad your dahaneh chaak --
rather colorful way of refering to your verbosity, shall we say? --
here in SCI?
Your position is quite clear. It is understood and rejected. (Can't
you live with that? ;)
Why are you taking usenet so seriously? (I am serious here. Relax
man. Its just words ..)
The 'communication' bit is done. I understand you Kavik Kang. I told
you long time ago I understand your position and your Value System.
All this is just vain talk and I am not really interested.
(Do you see me trying to convince you of anything? I even told you, GO
AHEAD! ;))
I was when I was making my recipe but now it is done!
Voila!
oh:
We don't care about Russia, US, or any other country's nuclear arsenal.
We consider these weapons EVIL yet we understand that certain nations
simply DO NOT honor obligations and treaties.
Its life. What can you do?
So
Iran is simply insisting on HER rights.
Is this clear?
Do you get it?
Should I draw a picture for you??
I.K. Flin
"I.K. Flin" <rsav...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:...
Joubin Houshyar
A
IRI is irrelevant.
B
Iran is a test case for the establishment of the 'new' Global Regime.
Many nations have vested interest in the outcome of this issue. Iran
is playing the Jesus role .. but we are not alone and even Jesus
(Salaam!) had Helpers ...
Obviously it is a very critical time in our Nation's history, and thus,
superficial and transitory considerations are highly un-Welcome (after
the initial presentation for analysis and dispatch to the bin.)
C
Any Iranian who in any way supports the lasting diminshment of Iran's
Sovereign Rights; who supports starvation sanctions on IRAN; who lies
in service of temporary and transitional considerations; such Iranians
are at best thoughtless, and at worst ...
D
Your toilet talk is offensive.
E
Have a lovely life Iris. Learn to temper your intolerance towards the
belief systems of others. Minimally take the effort to *clearly*
understand it. (This in itself will pay back handsome dividends later
in your life ...)
Kavik Kang
> The context has changed.
Incoherant babble! "Context" has nothing to do with anything. You have
again failed to respond to the two simple questions in any way, shape or
form. Are you completely incapable of honest discussion? Earlier you made
a post basically saying that Iran does want nuclear weapons because they are
too good for nuclear weapons. You also critized the US for not reducing
it's nuclear arsenal, which is simply not true. Here, yet again, are the
two simple questions that you keep attempting to deflect attention away
from... (You really suck at this, by the way, you are being exposed for the
enemy propagandist that you are right now in this thread and don't even
realize it). Answer the two simple questions, directly related to posts you
made earlier today... This is like your forth or fifth chance to do so,
instead you just keep attempting to deflect attention away from them. Here
they are again...
1) If Iran is not attempting to build nuclear weapons, why have they
developed long range missiles?
...and
2) If Iran is so deeply and honestly concerned with their precious NPT why
do they not critisize Russia for failing almost completely to reduce their
nuclear arsenal? The US has done so, eliminating more than half of it's
cold war era arsenal. The Russians have not done so.
> But this is a bit puzzling.
This is puzzeling, you appear to be incapable of answering simple questions
and instead you attempt to use dishonest trickery to deflect attention away
from any serious discussion. It is quite puzzeling indeed, although if you
are trying to be an enemy propagandist it does, of course, all make perfect
sense.
> It is not clear ?why? you consistently goshaad your dahaneh chaak --
> rather colorful way of refering to your verbosity, shall we say? --
> here in SCI?
You'd have to say that again in English for me to understand what you are
saying. But I've said many times that I come here because there is a real
danger that the US will be forced to nuke Iran back to the stone age and I'd
rather not see that happen. It isn't much, in fact it is probably nothing,
but attempting to hammer some obvious truths into some Iranians in the hope
that these truths spread among at least some of them is all I have the power
to do.
> Your position is quite clear. It is understood and rejected. (Can't
> you live with that? ;)
Rejected by who? You? Who cares, you are a nobody! And these aren't "my
positions", I am attmepting to relay the obvious truths of the basic
situation. If you haven't noticed, I am quite limited in what I say. That
is precisely because I am limiting myself to truisms for which their is no
counter argument. These are not my opinions, this is simply how the world
works. If a global nuclear superpower is willing to use force to prevent a
minor nation of insignificant military power from doing something, than the
global nuclear superpower is going to get it's way. If a nation builds long
range missiles, they are attempting to build nuclear weapons. I limit
myself to plain and simple truisms such as these. Iranians better learn
them quickly, because their time is running out.
> Why are you taking usenet so seriously? (I am serious here. Relax
> man. Its just words ..)
It is not just words. You know what our defense doctrine tells us to do if
a nation puts a nuclear weapon into a launchable position against our will?
It tells us to launch an ICBM from the US and nuke their nuke! Doctrine is
not law, it's the president's decision in the end, but if Iran puts a nuke
into a launchable position somebody needs to win an argument for Iran to not
be hit by the first nuclear weapon used since 1945. The default decision is
to nuke their nuke. You don't have any idea how seriously the US takes
nuclear weapons, do you? This could very well end with a nuclear attack on
Iran.
> The 'communication' bit is done. I understand you Kavik Kang. I told
> you long time ago I understand your position and your Value System.
No you haven't, you've never been close. And considering that we have been
through 4 or 5 posts now without you coming anywhere near answering the two
simple questions posed in response to your post about Iran not wanting
nuclear weapons, this cannot be considered a "conversation". It is actually
more of a "game" where you attempt to avoid a conversation and deflect
attention away from two questions that you don't want to try to answer. No
"conversation" has taken place between us today, only your avoiding a
conversation has taken place.
> All this is just vain talk and I am not really interested.
Actually it's an attempt at education, so far you get an F.
> (Do you see me trying to convince you of anything? I even told you, GO
> AHEAD! ;))
I don't think you actually know anything... And I told you, you are too
stupid to understand that we are waiting for the election in Iran to see
what happens with that. You really are stupid to not understand that Iran's
election is the only thing holding us back right now.
> We don't care about Russia, US, or any other country's nuclear arsenal.
> We consider these weapons EVIL yet we understand that certain nations
> simply DO NOT honor obligations and treaties.
Then why are you building them if you consider them evil? Iran is very
obviosly attempting to build nuclear weapons. And you are right that
certain nations don't honor treaties, Iran would be at or near the top of
that list. You also made a post earlier critiszing the US for not reducing
it's nuclear arsenal, which was simply another display of your near-total
ignorance. We have reduced our nuclear arsenal by more than half, while the
Russians have not done so. So why do you critisize US when we have
complied, and not Russia when they are the ones who did not comply? Could
it be that you are nothing more than a raving enemy propagandist and the
facts mean nothing too you? Could it be that you are merely reaching for
any straw you can grasp at to try and use against the country you hate so
much? I think so.
> Its life. What can you do?
>
> So
>
> Iran is simply insisting on HER rights.
Iran does not have a "right" to nuclear weapons. So actually Iran is
attempting to do something they are not allowed to do. It has nothing to do
with "rights".
> Is this clear?
>
> Do you get it?
>
> Should I draw a picture for you??
A picture of what? You avoiding answering two simple questions yet again?
A picture of Iranians building nuclear weapons? A picture of Terhan
dissolving in a nuclear fireball? Iran doesn't have a "right" to nuclear
weapons, so that's certainly not a picture that you could draw.
Are you going to answer the two simple questions, or are you going to avoid
them yet again and further prove your dishonest intent? They are at the top
of this post, all you have to do is qoute them back instead of eraseing them
and attempting to deflect attention from them and answer them. It really is
a simple thing. But then, you are not participating in a discussion, you
are only spreading propaganda... thanks for demonstrating that for everyone
today.
Joubin Houshyar
There is no discussion!
You are simply proposing this:
US and Russia are the most powerful nations on earth. Up to this
point, their beligerent stance aligned the world according to X. They
intend to continue to do so, even though in the interim, past 60 years,
certain things may have changed. Regardless. This is the way things
have been and we wish that they continue to be so. Iran is
understandably upset about this. That is because they entertain a
"delusional" value system that insists might does not make right. They
are wrong. If they don't do what is told they will find out they are
wrong. This is life. Deal with it. Or we will kill you all.
Did I get this correct?
Right?
So we thank you Kavik Kang for letting us know of your views on current
events.
As you may have noted (?) a counter view has been raised that this
'notion' that you propose, even if found acceptable during the cold
war, is no longer acceptable to an ever increasing group of nations.
These nations insist on effective Rule of Law and nothing but.
Clearly this is an idealistic position assuming a planet inhabited by
Humans. But alas, as you certainly know, not all bipeds on this planet
share these ("Delusional") notions.
So it may come to a scrap, or what not.
Or it may not!
Har chee khoda bekhaad.
Now
Thank you for posting to SCI.
It is important we all get to know what masquerades as thoughts in each
others heads ... even little rabid rabbits like you!
(Now have they programmed to type anything else? If yes, please do
so!! ;)
[I 'just' got an idea for a Rabbit Ear Soup ... but what to garnish it
with ...]
Kavik Kang
> Kavik,
>
> There is no discussion!
There certianly isn't, i'm the one who said that. You claimed it was a
discussion, yet another dishonest tactic on your part. Thank you again for
yet another fine demonstration. You have also again failed to answer the
two simple questions and instead attempted to deflect attention away from
them through dishonest trickery. Here they are for the 6th time, all you
need to do is not erase them and change the subject and simply answer them.
But, as should be clear to everyone by now, you will never do so as you are
an enemy propagandist with no interest in any form of honest discussion.
1) If Iran is not attempting to build nuclear weapons, why have they
developed long range missiles?
...and
2) If Iran is so deeply and honestly concerned with their precious NPT why
do they not critisize Russia for failing almost completely to reduce their
nuclear arsenal? The US has done so, eliminating more than half of it's
cold war era arsenal. The Russians have not done so.
> You are simply proposing this:
>
> US and Russia are the most powerful nations on earth. Up to this
> point, their beligerent stance aligned the world according to X. They
> intend to continue to do so, even though in the interim, past 60 years,
> certain things may have changed. Regardless. This is the way things
> have been and we wish that they continue to be so. Iran is
> understandably upset about this. That is because they entertain a
> "delusional" value system that insists might does not make right. They
> are wrong. If they don't do what is told they will find out they are
> wrong. This is life. Deal with it. Or we will kill you all.
>
> Did I get this correct?
>
> Right?
Not even close. I have never said anything even close to this. You really
are too stupid to understand even simple concepts, aren't you? Go back and
re-read what was said, although I doubt that you are intelligent enough to
understand the simple statements that were made. All you are capable of
doing is re-wording it into something that doesn't resemble the original
statements at all in an attempt to confuse the facts. This is, though, yet
another excellent example of the dishonest trickery that you use in your
propaganda campaign, so again, thanks for yet another excellent example of
your dishonest trickery.
Iran is not allowed to have nuclear weapons. The US refuses to go through a
second cold war with a minor nation of insignificant military power when it
is easily prevented by not allowing them to have nuclear weapons in the
first place. To build nuclear weapons against the will of a stronger power,
you need to be able to defend yourself from that stronger power. Since Iran
cannot possibly do this, it is not possible for them to build nuclear
weapons. These are the simple facts of the situation and none of your
dishonest trickery has any impact at all on this simple reality.
Are you ever going to answer the two simple questions?
> So we thank you Kavik Kang for letting us know of your views on current
> events.
Hahaha, thanks yet again for yet another excellent example of the dishonest
trickery that comprises your enemy propaganda! This was the best one yet.
You wrote your own warped version that has nothing to do with what I have
actually said and then here have claimed that they are "my views", hahaha.
You are really bad at this. You are discrediting yourself, not me,
hahahahaha.
> As you may have noted (?) a counter view has been raised that this
> 'notion' that you propose, even if found acceptable during the cold
> war, is no longer acceptable to an ever increasing group of nations.
It isn't relevant if it is found "acceptable" by anyone, since nobody can do
anything about it. On the other hand, the vast majority of nations support
the idea that the US and Russia remain the nuclear superpowers... since they
have proven their ability to avoid blowing up the world. So your statement
is merely a lie and propaganda. Most nations wish for the US and Russia to
remain the dominant nuclear powers. No nation wishes to see Iran replace
either of them. Welcome back to reality!
> These nations insist on effective Rule of Law and nothing but.
There is no such thing as "international law", at least not the way that you
believe it too exist. "International Law" has only ever had a single
enforcer... the United States! You probably don't know this, so I'll tell
you, "Law" is meaningless without enforcement. Welcome back to reality!
Are you going to answer the two simple questions that all of this, this
entire thread, has simply been a display of the type of dishonest trickery
that you use to avoid facts? Or are you just going to endlessly continue
with your dishonest trickery foolishly believing that everyone following the
thread can't see through? They can, you know, I'm making your dishonest
trickery obvious to everyone in this thread, you really have thouroughly
discredited yourself today... thanks for all the help!
It is so very simple to not erase the questions and answer them, this is
your sixth opportunity to do so...
Joubin Houshyar
No one banks with rabbits.
(Silly but fury .. oddly, a reassuring combination ..;)
Kavik Kang
> I don't 'bank' with you.
>
> No one banks with rabbits.
>
> (Silly but fury .. oddly, a reassuring combination ..;)
I guess we can all take this totally confusing complete non-response as an
admission of defeat on your part. You very obviously are not capable of
answering the two simple questions. Either that, or you are insane. Those
are the only two possible conclusions based on this confusing response.
Most likely, you are just wanting to get out of this "conversation" because
you have finally taken a step back and realize how throroughly your
dishonest trickery has been exposed here tonight. Thank you for all of the
help, I never could have done it without you!
As anyone can plainly see, this man is an enemy propagandist with absolutely
no interest at all in honest discussion. His sole goal is to attack the US
in any way that he can. He gave many examples of the type of dishonest
trickery he uses to avoid having to respond to questions, his sole goal is
lying and twisting facts in ahy way necessary in order to create propaganda
against the country he hates. When cornered, he uses creative editing and
changes the subject, hoping that readers will forget the original content of
the conversation. This is a suprisingly easy game to play, which allows
even people as stupid as he is to play it. But here, tonight, in this
thread, we've all seen a nearly perfect example of his little game.
In the future, just ignore this person, because he is clearly not credible
and his aggenda is obvious. My work here is done for tonight:-)
I.K. Flin
Please read. I have already posted on the issue. The IRI government kept
breaking all rules set by all nations.
Here we all are again. IRI says they will follow agreements after they admit
they have broken all past agreements. I still think the EU's request that
the IRI purchase their enriched Uranium is not asking for much in lieu of
the fact that the IRI has admitted to breaking every agreement ever made
with any country in the past. These are the same people that took US
diplomats hostage -an action that every country abhored, destroyed Iranian
culture to be replaced by Islam, and say they want a civilized society of
laws just before admitting that they broke the rules of the International
Atomic Energy Agency for 2 decades. Furthermore, the IRI uses the excuse
that it is everyone elses fault for the IRI's violations of past agreements.
-Iris
"Joubin Houshyar" <Sun_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1116732975.4...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
I.K. Flin
"Kavik Kang" <Kavik...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:TVSje.932$oT1...@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "Joubin Houshyar" <Sun_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1116731760.8...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>> ... My Khar keeps forgetting that I don't 'bank' with him ... now back
>> to the recipe ... Rabid Rabbit Roast with Zereshk and Baa Doom ... ;)
>
> So in other words you have no response. By the way, below is the original
> issue that you have avoided in all of your incoherant ramblings. This is
> what you have been replying too. As anyone can see, you have ignored it
> all
> along and merely attempted to deflect attention away from the actual
> subject
> of the conversation. Thank you for such an excellent example of the type
> of
> dishonest trickery that your kind relies on in a feeble attempt to
> maintain
> credability.
>
>
> "Really? Then why are they using elements of their program that are only
> needed if you wish to build nuclear weapons and are not needed for power?
> Why are they building long range missiles when the only practical use of a
> long range missile is to carry a nuclear warhead?
>
> They are like a 5 year old with a plan to fool his parents that any 6 year
> old can see right through.
Exactly. Which is one reason why many people think Iranians are stupid. IRI
government is simply incompetent.
It is very obvious to anyone who knows even just
> a little about nuclear weapons that Iran is attempting to build one. It
> is
> a cold war axiom that any nation working on long range missiles is
> attemtping to build a nuclear weapon. Their intent is obvious to all but
> those who are totally ignorant of nuclear weapons.
>
> You aren't fooling anyone, although Iran does look foolish believing that
> they are."
>
>
I am in complete agreement with you in this regard.
Best regards,
Iris
>